1337chess PRO v5.67-131213 ctg vs My FrIendS 1.9 Extreme ctg

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

A win is a win is a win   , but i draw your attention to the high number of draws and the games drawn with the exact same number of moves , both books were optimized as authors specify , is not for me to cast dispersions, despite the one author has been guilty of cloning and renaming the previous 1337 chess pro book , these 2 books are not of identical or close size / opinions welcomed
Games are 4+2 Blitz and available to regular contributors and Micheal Wagner


  

Bettina wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

A win is a win is a win   , but i draw your attention to the high number of draws  and the games drawn with the exact same number of moves , both books were optimized as authors specify , is not for me to cast dispersions, despite the one author has been guilty of cloning and renaming the previous 1337 chess pro book , these 2 books are not of identical or close size / opinions welcomed
Games are 4+2 Blitz and available to regular contributors and Micheal Wagner


  

  

- By Nelson Hernandez (Gold) [us] Date 2013-12-31 13:06
That's a completely unanswerable question. All books have different characteristics of depth, breadth and accuracy. If you run 50 books in a tournament you'll probably find that the winner happened to include a few key moves in common openings that consistently tripped up 20 of the other engines. Do you judge a book's strength on the basis of a few key moves?

No accurate measurement tools exist to measure strength. Merely looking at tournament results doesn't do the job. What might be useful instead would be a set of metrics measuring a range of different properties. Things like how narrow its opening repertoire is, low long it stays in book on average, its average evaluation upon book-exit, its success-rate and draw-rate by color, etc

VitruviusH wrote:

- By Nelson Hernandez (Gold) [us] Date 2013-12-31 13:06
That's a completely unanswerable question.  All books have different characteristics of depth, breadth and accuracy.  If you run 50 books in a tournament you'll probably find that the winner happened to include a few key moves in common openings that consistently tripped up 20 of the other engines.  Do you judge a book's strength on the basis of a few key moves?

No accurate measurement tools exist to measure strength.  Merely looking at tournament results doesn't do the job.  What might be useful instead would be a set of metrics measuring a range of different properties.  Things like how narrow its opening repertoire is, low long it stays in book on average, its average evaluation upon book-exit, its success-rate and draw-rate by color, etc

Nelson is a capitalist , who speaks from his backside , what has his post got to do with Bettina and Goldminer 999 showing this fool from India does not make his own book he clones and  plagiarizes others work . he is a cheat , a faker
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] .he will likely clone parts of the latest Hiarcs book next
please keep on topic and do not post anything from that clones and cheats toilet here again